and so when we say let's have a moment of silence, that's just way to tap into something that is already a part of us, a part of the way we humans show something has been done to us that deserves our respect, our strongest feelings for the part of us that has been taken from us. and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. thank you for joining us tonight. all right. this right here, these ten pages represent the biggest news in the country today. this is the criminal complaint filed today against 19-year-old dzhokhar tsarnaev, the surviving suspect in the boston marathon bombing. and this ten-page criminal complaint is big news for two reasons. it's news for the incredible details of the allegations contained within it, and it is news because of the simple fact that it exists. let's start with the news. the complaint describes in heart stopping detail exactly what authorities -- of the bombing itself.

quote, approximately 30 seconds before the first explosion, dzhokhar tsarnaev lifts his phone to his ear as if he is speaking on his cell phone and keeps it there for approximately 18 seconds. a few seconds after he finishes the call, the large crowd of people around him can be seen reacting to the first explosion. virtually every head turns to the east towards the finish line and stares in that direction in apparent bewilderment and alarm. dzhokhar appears calm. he glances to the east and calmly begin but rapidly begins moving to the west. he walks away without his knapsack, having left it on the ground where he had been standing. approximately ten seconds later, an explosion occurs in the location where he had placed his knapsack. the criminal complaint today also adds terrifying new texture about what we knew about the events leading up to dzhokhar tsarnaev's capture and his brother's death. we knew the brothers were accused friday night of carjacking man driving a black

mercedes suv after their photos had been released by the fbi. and the carjacking victim was ultimately able to call police from a nearby gas station where dzhokhar was captured on a security camera. here is what we did not know until today. according to the complaint, here is how the carjacking went down. one of the suspects pointed a firearm at the victim and stated did you hear about the boston explosion? i did that. then, again, according to the complaint, after stopping at an atm to try to withdraw money from the victim's bank account, the two men and the victim then drove to a gas station convenience store where the two men got out of the car at which point the victim managed to escape. the carjacking victim was not released. he escaped, and he was able to do that, because according to the authorities, both brothers left him alone in the car at the gas station after telling him they were the boston marathon bombers. we also learned through the court filing that in a search of dzhokhar tsarnaev's dorm room yesterday, authorities found, quote, a black jacket and a white hat of the same general appearance as those worn by

bomber two at the boston marathon during the bombing. so the 19-year-old surviving boston marathon bombing suspect is not just an alleged criminal bomber/murderer, he is an alleged extremely sloppy criminal bomber murderer. for all that incredible detail, this complaint filed in court today against dzhokhar tsarnaev is big news, but it is also big news simply for existing as a criminal complaint filed in federal court today. now, this should not be contested terrain in american political life. but the fact is, it is contested terrain. there should be no question that an american citizen accused of committing a heinous crime on american soil would be charged as a criminal in american civilian court. but there are political forces trying to make that a question. as we watch this all unfold last week, it looked to me like we were headed toward a fork in the road where particularly if the suspects turned out to be foreign nationals, we might very well skid off into a legal nether world into indefinite detention or military tribunals. even after we knew the one

surviving suspect was an american citizen, a cadre of u.s. senators, people sworn to uphold the constitution were calling for him to be tried not as an american citizen suspected of a heinous crime, but as an enemy combatant. and so this complaint being filed in federal court today was a victory. it was a victory against the demagogues. it was the victory over the forces of hysteria and panic that have tried to destabilize what should be stable, routine, expected. because today in moving forward in civilian court, the obama administration treated the efforts of certain vocal republicans to troll the president into engaging in a lawless departure from established precedent as exactly that, as trolling on and a half of a ridiculous and illegal proposition. >> he will not be treated as an enemy combatant. we will prosecute this terrorist under u.s. law. united states citizens cannot be tried in military commissions.

this is absolutely the right way to go and the appropriate way to go. and when it comes to united states citizens, it is against the law to try them in military commissions. >> and it matters that the white house is treating the idea of holding an american citizen outside of the american legal system as what it is, which is crazy and unacceptable. and it matters that appears to be where americans stand on the issue too. when asked just last week in the midst of the aftermath of the boston bombing, with the images and videos of the horror there, the top of everyone's mind, which worries you more, the government will not go far enough to investigate terrorism because of concerns about constitutional rights, or that it will go too far in compromising constitutional rights in order to investigate terrorism. more people answered they are more worried about the government going too far. today is the first day of a big, important test for us as a country. a test of whether we will as a society demonstrate courage and resilience and thoughtfulness and compassion and a resolute commitment to justice with all that word entails, or whether we

will succumb to the cause of demagogues who will have us react with suspicion and lawlessness and overreaction. when dzhokhar tsarnaev was charged with this criminal complaint today at his hospital bedside and read his miranda rights, that was an important moment in this test. because while there is more to this test than this moment, we did learn in this moment they are going to try this guy according to our laws and values, as a sloppy criminal he is alleged to be. joining me at the table don borelli and vince warren. it's great to have you both here. so i refer to unnamed troll, republican senators who were calling for enemy combatant to be applied to this 19-year-old suspect. i want to play a little bit of sound from senator lindsey graham who was probably the most outspoken about this. take a listen. >> i believe our nation is at war.

the enemy is radical islam, defined as the taliban, al qaeda, and affiliated groups. the question i have regarding this case is there any association between these two individuals and the groups i just named to allow enemy combatant status to be conferred upon the suspect in boston. >> don, you and i were talking about this a lot last week as the investigation was unfolding. >> right. >> what is your reaction to that? >> i -- it seems to be that there is a notion among certain people in congress that having a criminal justice system that is effective is incompatible with gathering intelligence. we've seen so many cases where they both can work together. for example, the david hadley case, faisal shahzad, naisul. all of these guys have been convicted in federal criminal

court, and all of these guys have been intelligence bonanzas to the intelligence community. if done smartly, you can have your cake and eat it too. i think sometimes there is a misconception it's either all intelligence or all criminal, and never the two shall meet, and that's wrong. >> center for constitutional rights has been working for years since 9/11 in the wake of the nether region of law created by guantanamo, et cetera, to try to wrench our system back squarely on the legal footing. were you worried last week about what would happen if and when we caught the suspects? and what was your reaction today to the charges being filed and to lindsey graham's calls of this nature being largely i think marginalized and ignored? >> well, first of all, i'm really shocked. i don't know why lindsey graham hates the constitution as much as he does, but he does. but i think getting back to last week, i was deeply worried. and i think folks on my staff at ctr were deeply worried this was going to go in a very different

way than it ended up going. there was a lot of discussion around miranda, a lot of discussion about enemy combatants. and i think given the heinous crime that happened in boston, that folks like lindsey graham, and frankly the political sideshow that developed around the calls for this and calls for that really did not do justice to the people that are suffering in boston right now. the best solution is the constitution. the constitution is not the enemy. it's the people that commit these crimes. and the last piece is it's deeply important the trial and the mechanism we have is full and fair. that's the only way that we can as a society get out of this. >> i don't want to give this more credence than it deserves. but one follow-up question. can you just dub someone an enemy combatant? >> george bush did. >> that's the question, right? is that a legal maneuver that graham was advocating? what carney said today at the back and forth in the press room was it is simply not legal to try an american civilian for a crime committed on our soil in a

military commission. >> and it's not for lack of trying with the bush administration. but i think that that's absolutely correct. it is absolutely separate and apart and not connected to our constitution that we try people that are american citizens that have committed crimes in anything other -- >> accused of committing crimes. >> exactly. accused of committing crimes in anything other than u.s. courts for that purpose. >> so you just mentioned miranda. so the other thing, the big thing that happened today there are two remarkable events today. there was the filing of the criminal complaint, which i was waving around, and they released a suspect of a procedural hearing that happened actually at the bedside in the hospital with a federal magistrate who was brought in. that federal magistrate informed dzhokhar tsarnaev, the 19-year-old suspect, of his rights to counsel, and there was actually defense counsel present. my question to you is he was apprehended friday night. he has been in and out of consciousness as far as we can tell.

he has a throat wound, so he is writing things down. the administration has made use of a public safety exception in not reading him his rights. and i want to read from a memo in 2010 that went out to the fbi from the justice department that says there may be exceptional cases in which although all relevant public safety questions have been asked, are there other plots, other bombs, et cetera, agents nonetheless conclude unwarranted investigation is necessary to collect timely intelligence in the government's interest in obtaining this outweighs with proceeding with unwarranted interrogation. don, do you think this was an -- a judicious use of this asserted authority in this case? >> i think it is. i think this was appropriate in this case, because it's not just what is the immediate threat around boston. it's also the larger threat that this person may have access to that type of information. other people involved in the plot overseas, other areas that could have co-conspirators, other cells, if you will. so i think, you know, the government was given this tool,

the exception which seems to be appropriately named given all the exception about this. so the government should use every tool available in the tool box as long as it's used smartly and with caution. >> and you think it was in this case? >> i think it was in this case. >> there is a huge danger here. and i think, you know, i'll give the government all the credit for using federal courts instead of military courts. but the important piece that we have to remember is that the exception, the supreme court case was about giving law enforcement some latitude in the immediate area around public safety to ask some questions. >> like right now where is the gun is actually -- >> exactly. in a rain case, somebody has a gun without -- a holster without a gun, where is the gun? that makes a lot of sense. but it was not designed to have a full and broad questioning of everything that ever happened. but the important piece to remember is that the government can ask a suspect anything that they want.

but the miranda and the fifth amendment limits what is admissible in court. >> so the risk you're running is a risk of inadmissibility, because this part of the law, this -- a public safety exception of this magnitude is as yet untested before the courts. >> absolutely. >> and so the risk you're running, you're taking on some risk that what he wrote down on a pad as far as reporting is not admissible, although my sense, don, the government is fairly confident they can convict? >> i would think even if somehow they lost some of his statement, there is so much other evidence. and, you know, if you look back to the abdulmutallab, they went to his bedside and asked him questions without miranda under the public safety exception, and those would have been admissible had he not plead guilty. >> the surprising tweet of the weekend, glenn beck tweeted i despise this terrorist and all he has done, but we must not lose who we are. he is an american. read him his rights. we are not russia. glenn beck has a very narrow

exception of the exception. don borelli and vince warren, great to have you here. >> thank you. september 5th, 2001, president george bush stood side by side with mexican president vicente fox and talked about reform as a goal worthy of our two great nations. a week later a distant memory after the terrorist takes on our soil. one week after another mass casualty event, will immigration reform suffer the same fate once again? that's coming up. when news breaks, you have to be prepared, but all i do to be broadcast ready damages my hair and scalp. then i uncovered head & shoulders damage rescue. it relieved my scalp and rescued my damaged hair. the proof? see it tonight, at eleven. head & shoulders damage rescue.

we have a new update we can report on the boston marathon bombing case. several officials familiar with the initial interrogation of dzhokhar tsarnaev in the hospital, which we were just talking about, describe him as cooperative. a senior government official says he has told them by writing answers or nodding yes or shaking his head no to others that he and his brothers were not in touch with any overseas terrorists or groups, that they conceived the bombing attack on their own, motivated he told them by religious fervor. they got their instructions from how to make bombs from the internet, he said, according to the officials. we just got that reporting in and wanted to update you on that.

now, earlier today, this was the scene at the united states senate. >> i say that particularly those who are pointing to what happened, the terrible tragedy in boston as a -- i would say excuse for not doing a bill or delaying it in months or years. >> i never said that. >> i didn't say you did. >> i never said that. >> i didn't say you did, sir. >> that was today's hearing on the immigration reform bill on which some republican senators did in fact suggest the bill be see through the prism of the boston marathon bombings. senator chuck grassley of iowa among them. today republican congressman and former vice presidential candidate paul ryan and democratic congressman luis gutierrez campaigned in chicago. and said the boston marathon bombings should not slow reform. i would say for the sake of our national security we want to modernize our immigration laws. we do not know how to even track people who overstay their visas. joining me from washington, gaby pacheco and steve cohn, democrat

from tennessee. it's great to have you back here, congressman. gaby, i want to begin with you. you gave very moving testimony today before the committee. i guess my first question to you is what was the atmosphere in that room like? what sense did you get of what effect last week's events have had on the conversation, and as an activist who has been working on this before, is there some part of you that is dreading that what you have worked on for so long may possibly be endangered by what happened last week? >> actually, i think a lot of us were holding our breath and trying to see what was happening. at first we were praying and making sure that people were okay. but secondly, that they didn't try to correlate this with immigration. unfortunately, they have started. but we're in a different time.

we're a different world. and i think that the paradigm has shifted on immigrants and immigration as a whole in the country. and so even though there was intention at the beginning there on the panel, i think that there is a lot more acceptance, and i think that this bill is moving forward, regardless of what happened in boston. >> do you really think that? you really think -- we've been trying to game out in the wake of finding out that the people who are alleged to have done this were born abroad, which obviously i think bears no logical bearing on how comprehensive immigration reform should go forward, but might have a kind of political truck. and you really came away from the hearing today reassured that it is on track? >> well, i think the first thing is that they had another undocumented person speaking at it. this is the third time they have an undocumented person testify in front of the senate. and so that says a lot. and i think things are changing.

i think also the narratives of people like carlos arredondo, who is also an immigrant, who, you know, without any regards to his life went in there and started pinching and grabbing people and taking them out and throwing fences that were there to save people. and not only that, his son had also gone to iraq and died in iraq fighting for this country. so i think that the stories, the pictures that we're putting the faces of immigrants that are coming out and saying we love this country. we want to serve, have really been able to balance out. >> that's fascinating. >> what we hear with the fear mongering. >> congressman, you understand the politics here. we're seeing now there has been a group working on trying to get to a bipartisan place in the house to match the beginning of eight on the senate. we saw gutierrez and paul ryan today. what are you hearing from your colleagues about the direction

of this, and what effect, if any do you think last week has? >> i think we have a gang of eight in the house too. and i think they've been doing a lot of very intense work. and i think they're going to have a bill soon. the issue is whether speaker boehner will take their bill as a whole, or whether they'll break it up into parts and let mike mccaul have part of it in homeland and good low have part of it in judiciary. >> what would that mean if it was broken up for the bill's prospects? >> it would mean that probably border security would get passed, and maybe stem would get passed, but some other areas would not. and the dream act would probably be in limbo and probably have a problem. and that would be unfortunate. very unfortunate. >> that would mean it wouldn't be comprehensive immigration reform. >> it would be piecemeal. >> gaby, what is your response to that? i should note for folks you were born in ecuador. you came here as a child. you are subject to the deferred action that was announced last year, meaning that you have a normalized status now, even though you don't have citizenship. what is your sense of the state of play of the house? you've been an incredible activist on this issue. and what would it mean if it did get broken up as the congressman just noted? >> well, i think that that's something that we're expecting. the house is a totally -- the temperature of it is a little

bit different. but i think that what is going to happen is it is going to allow for different people to vote on different issues and different bills and what they mostly feel comfortable with. i think that with agricultural workers and the dream act, it's two pieces that we have come along way. for eric cantor and other, john boehner to talk in favor of the dream act, i think we've seen that we're going to have support of it. so we're going to see it in the a piecemeal in the house. i think we're going get a lot of legislations out of the house. and once they come into conference, you know, we're going to get a bill that will be comprehensive. >> how much have things changed in terms of the tenor of this, particularly in house part? the house republican caucus is probably the most conservative legislative caucus we've seen in many, many years, generations, possibly. have you -- what is the tenor of the rhetoric amongst your republican colleague there's, and it is moving in a direction where you can actually see

something getting done? >> i think we're going to have something accomplished. and i think it's because -- stephen colbert said until the scientists can create a way for a hispanic woman to give birth to an old white man, the republicans for politics are going to have to be for immigration reform. and they are. they realize that they're going to be dragged into the 21st century as they have been on other issues. they're being dragged on health care. they're being dragged on minimum wage. they're being dragged for the last 20, 30 years they've been dragged. and that's what is happening. but they know politically they have to pass a bill. dream act's probably got a better chance than path to citizenship if it's broken up. and speaker boehner is going to try to do it. he is going to ease along some. it shouldn't make a difference. for people who want to stop it or slow it down. >> it's going to be interesting to see how that plays out. gaby, i trust your judgment on this. and i too after watching the opening fireworks was actually fairly happy with the general tenor of the debate today. gaby pacheco, director of the bring project, which has been doing the dragging that congressman steve cohn was

talking about. we will see you again later in the program. all right. up next, the major news story from last week that was overshadowed by the events in boston, but contains just as many, if not more troubling unanswered questions. that's coming up.

city of boston fell silent today at 2:50 p.m., exactly one week after the first of two explosions ripped through the boston marathon, kill league people wounding more than 170 near the finish line.

>> trading stopped on the floor of the new york stock exchange. krystle campbell, one of the people who died in the bombing, had her funeral today. campbell, sean collier, martin richard and lu lingzi lost their lives. in texans continue to grief for the 14 people killed after the plant exploded and destroyed part of the town. the "new york times" described the mall memorial for first responders this way. they faced each other in two lines in the parking lot of the school, forming two walls of blue as the body of a fellow firefighter was escorted between them in the night. the scale of the disaster could be measured by the length of the ceremony. the firefighters and responders stood in the cold for about two hours, forming an honor guard 12 times for 12 bodies. among the firefighters who died

was 52-year-old kenny harris, captain with dallas fire-rescue, who lived in west and had reportedly been off-duty when he learned of the fire at the plant. jerry chapman, the member of the abbott volunteer vice president and morris bridges of the west volunteer fire department. there may not be a nobler civic undertaking than being a volunteer firefighter. it is mutual aid at its most praiseworthy there is no individual upside and no pay and no perks, other than getting to ride the engine down main street on july 4th. all there is risk. in almost any other week, the explosion in west, texas, would have been a huge national news story, but it was overshadowed by the horrifying and incredibly compelling events coming out of boston. i think one of the things all of us have wrestled with this week or even in the past few months in the wake of the mass shooting in newtown is how do we collectively respond to tragedy, think about its causes and aftermath and formulate policies and motive politics and response. the shook shooting quickly segued into a policy debate about guns and gun safety. we're already seeing it in the

aftermath of boston. we'll talk about enemy combatants and whether the marathon bombing should delay immigration reform since both suspects were foreign-born. but west, texas, has not yet captured our political attention the same way. part of this has to do with the specific intense focus we give terrorism since 9/11. and there is something about accidents that seem more random and somehow less menacing than the malevolent acts of individuals. but the way we process as tragedy and its aftermath has huge implications on the way our society acts. last week, the night after the fertilizer plant exploded, we showed you a chart that deserves to be highlighted again. from 2000 to 2010, 3,033 americans died from terror attacks. during that same time, more than 335,000 americans died at the hands of a gun, while there were over 60,000 workplace deaths. around this time last year in a speech to commemorate workers' memorial day, former secretary hilda solis said every day in america 12 people go to work and

never come home. every year in america, nearly four million people suffer a workplace injury from which some may never recover. these are preventible tragedies that disable our workers, devastate our families, and damage our economy. now it looks increasingly like the fertilizer plant that exploded last wednesday may have been a preventible tragedy. according to reuters, the plant had been storing more than 1300 times the amount of ammonium nitrate fertilizer that would normally alert the u.s. department of homeland security to a possible safety oversight. that's 100 times more than the amount of ammonium nitrate used in the oklahoma city bombing. representative thompson from mississippi and a ranking member of the house committee on homeland security released a statement saying, quote, it seems this manufacturer was willfully off the grid. yet we understand the department of homeland security did not even know the plant existed until it blew up. i strongly believe if the proper safeguards were in place, the loss of life and destruction could have been far less

extensive. while many of the initial mist relatives boston quickly appeared to come into focus, in texas, we're left mostly with unanswered questions. first and foremost, what caused the catastrophic explosion at the plant? what responsibility does donald adair, owner of the west fertilizer corporation have for the death, injuries, and mayhem that ensued? what regulations were in effect that were not applied? and what regulations do we need in the future to prevent something like this from happening again? and which federal agencies are best equipped to inspect and supervisor plants like this. the department of homeland security didn't know about west fertilizer plant. what other plants does it not know about? all of these questions demand an answer. and through this week on "all in," we're going to be tracking those answers down. we'll be right back with clip three.

before there was boston there was major nidal malik hasan accused of killing 13 people at a terror attack in ft. hood in texas. it's one link in the chain of events leading to the assassination of a radical clerk

and american sten named anwar al awlaki. war reporter jeremy scahill tells us what it means in the aftermath of boston. but first, i want to share the three awesomest things on the internet beginning from kathleen elder, who points us to robert towell. the latest video dispatch from commander chris hadfield of the international space station. he enjoys informing the people of earth with these highly educational entertaining videos from how to stay fit in space which is difficult to how to cook spinach in space. his latest submission hadfield answers a question what happens when you dip a washcloth in water and try to wring it out. the answer is something truly bizarre and amazing. >> the water is all over my hands. in fact, it rings out of the cloth into my hands. if i let go of the cloth carefully, the water sort of sticks to my hands. >> as the news junkie put it, that was way more fascinating than it really should be.

the second awesomest thing on the internet is this exquisitely rendered captivating interactive feature in the "new york times" about the boston marathon bombings. it indicated more than a dozen people when the bomb went off. you can click on the runner or spectator from the image taken at 4:09:43 into the race. you can read about that person's background and listen to them give a firsthand account of where they were when the bomb went off. it's a really graceful oral history of that particular moment in time. definitely makes some time to click around on it. and the third awesomest thing on the internet today, an apparent and welcome change in policy from the federal communications commission, or at the very least, a temporary departure. over the weekend the boston red sox held their first home game since the marathon bombings. fans poured into fenway park to witness a rousing pregame ceremony, which included words

of encouragement from red sox designated hitter david ortiz. >> this is a [ bleep ] city. [ cheering ] and nobody going to -- stay strong. >> oh, big papi. now we bleeped out the expletive there, but it aired saturday on live television, just as big papi said it live and unbleeped. instead of slapping him and the network with a hefty fine, the fcc decided to let this slide, tweeting this reaction, david ortiz spoke from the heart at today's red sox game. i stand with big papi and the people of boston, which i might add is really f-ing great. you can find all the links for click 3 on our website, allinwithchris.com. we'll be right back.

i'm only in my 60's... i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks,

and you never need a referral to see a specialist. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands a year in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience.

so i know how important that is. right now at this very moment in the aftermath of the boston marathon bombings, the united states finds itself at a critical juncture in the still unfolding story of how the obama administration combats threats to american civilians and wages what it no longer calls the global war on terror. from the very beginning after september 11th, american policy in this area has been constructed through a series of often ad hoc decisions made during the intense moments following acts of violence against the united states. those decisions have then gone on to have tremendous ripple effects and unintended consequences. today as we find ourselves in one of those intense freighted and immense moments, the question of how the obama

administration reacts is one we should all be paying attention to. and there is no journalist in america, in the world who has reported on what the war on terror actually looks like under the obama better than any next guest, jeremy scahill. his amazing chronicle of the obama war on terror, new book "dirty wars" publishes tomorrow. the film of the same name will be in theaters in june. "dirty war" is probably the most comprehensive account to date of what america's battlefield looks like, a battlefield constructed with each new drone strike and each new frontier, the product of hundreds of individual decisions made under duress in reaction to an uncertain world that now add up to a global battlefield without front lines or clearly marked boundaries. jeremy scahill joins me tonight. he is a national security correspondent for "the nation" magazine, author of the book "dirty wars." the producer of the movie of the same name. it's such an amazing thing to have you here.

this book is an unbelievable accomplishment. the movie is an incredible accomplishment. and anyone watching this, people that know your work from "the nation," what i want to emphasize about this book, whatever your politics, you should read this book. it is an incredibly carefully report. people who come to this book expecting a polemic. it shows a side of our unending wars that we haven't seen. >> one of the things really fascinating to me about the process is i met a lot of guys from if special ops community and cia community because of my work on black water. i got numerous calls, people came up to me at events that i would is a i don't particularly like black water, but you were right. i developed a number of resources from the world, and they changed the way that i viewed my own politics. and i feel like i came to have a much better understanding of what those guys do on a daily basis around the world. so part of this book tells the

story of jsoc operations. i don't ming well the powerful, chris. my sources are guys doing the operation, mid level guys to lower level guys that are a part of this apparatus. and there are books that are published that are based on the leaks from the white house. my book tells the story of the foot soldiers in these wars, and also tells the story of the civilians who live on the other side of our missiles or the other side of the night raids. try to tell a story that was multidimensional and had both the cia jsoc perspective as well as the civilians who are caught in this in yemen, somalia and elsewhere. >> jsoc is the joint special operations command. it is a huge conduit for pursuing the policy of the obama battlefield. i want to start in 2009. omar farouk abdulmutallab. he tries to blow up a plane. he isn't successful, ends up setting himself on fire. he details his relationship with the american born yemeni cleric

am war al awlaki, including a trip to yemen. awlaki becomes the first american citizen put on the kill list. tell us about awlaki. he figures large in this book. >> anwar awlaki's family gave me complete access to their archives and family history and photos, and i was allowed to interview multiple family member. i talked to his mother. i talked to his sister. i talked to all of anwar al awlaki's siblings. he was a guy who after 9/11 was an imam at a big moss income virginia and was a go-to imam, profiled by "the washington post." he probably would have been on your show if you were on at the time. and pr, pbs, across the board, and was a guy that really seemed to be struggle with how muslims should respond to 9/11. but says the u.s. has the right to hunt those responsible for

9/11, condemn the attacks, said that al qaeda had perverted islam. but you saw a radicalization that happened with anwar al awlaki, particularly when the bush administration invaded iraq and we saw what happened at guantanamo. he decided to hightail it out of the united states. he started preaching more and more radically against the u.s. wars and talking about a global war on islam. you saw the rhetoric from bush people escalating, al awlaki's radicalization increases. he eventually goes back to yemen where he is arrested on orders from washington and put in the yemeni prison for 18 months, 17 of them in solitary confinement. i reviewed all of his prison writings. he comes out of prison and starts a blog. and he is answering questions on anything from it is it acceptable for muslims to eat cheese bought in the supermarkets to questions about is suicide bombing acceptable under islam. and he develops this huge community. when he first started to really

hit on the u.s. radar in a major way was when nidal hasan shot up many of his fellow soldiers at ft. hood, texas, in that horrid massacre. and we learned that awlaki had been in e-mail contact with nidal hasan. the e-mails have been declassified and showed that hasan was like a stalker. he was asking awlaki to find him a wife. awlaki wasn't responding to him. awlaki is kind of ignoring him and say yeah, brother, if i find you a wife, i'll let you know. and then nidal hasan commits this heinous crime and kills all of these soldiers, and awlaki responds by printing a blog that says nidal hasan is a hero, and essentially calls on other soldiers, if they're muslim, to do the same thing that nidal hasan did. and that really was when most americans heard about anwar al awlaki. so he is added to the list. not only is he killed in a drone strike, his son, an american citizen, abdulrahman al awlaki is killed.

there had been another discussion about was it a mistake. you have new reporting in the book about the reporting of the president when he finds out about the death. >> just to clarify, abdulrahman al awlaki was born in denver. he had not seen his father for two years. the last time he saw him in 2009. he was living with his grandparents, upstanding citizens in yemen. he ran away from home, trying to find his father. two weeks later, he is sitting outside with his teenaged cousins when a drone enters yemeni airspace and kills him and his cousins. there has never been an official accounting of what happened from the obama administration, only through leaks. the ultimate conclusion it was an outrageous mistake and they were trying to kill a terrorist named ibrahim. he is still alive. we don't know who the intended target was. but what i am reporting for

first time is a former senior administration official, who worked on the targeted killing program, told me that when president obama found out that abdulrahman al awlaki had been killed, he was incredibly upset about this. and that john brenneman who at the time was the senior terrorism investigator believed that jsoc or the cia may have intentionally killed him, perhaps on faulty intelligence that he was 21 years old or that he was simply a relative of anwar al awlaki. so brenneman ordered a review. and i asked the former senior official what happened to the review and he said i don't know. i asked the national security council spokesperson around she told me we won't talk about it. >> i want to talk more about this and talk about where counterterrorism goes from here right after we take this break. i want more suds! dawn? you won't last. [ female announcer ] a drop of dawn has active suds that stay stronger longer, so you can clean 2x more greasy dishes. to get the job done. you're full of suds after all. now drop and give me twenty spaghetti bowls! [ female announcer ] dawn does more. [ sponge ] so it's not a chore.

woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen.

let's bring into this conversation emma gilligan. welcome back steve cohn of tennessee. and jeremy, one of the three lines in this book we were just talking about the fact that american citizens had been on this kill list. the kill list is the kind of central character of the book, this central policy tool of finding folks the government has

judged a threat. in working with this list we sometimes work with unsavory forces. you have amazing footage in the book where we are essentially cooperating with war lords that under any other circumstances it would be hard to imagine would count as an ally. >> we're essentially outsourcing the kill program in somalia to these thugs. some of these people are lined up by the cia and given $200 monthly cash payments. i discovered a cia base at the airport in mogadishu, somalia and that american interrogators are using an underground prison where they're interrogating suspected members of al shabaab or other targets. and under the obama administration, renditions have continued. one man was snatched off the streets of nairobi and sent to this secret prison in the basement of mogadishu's airport. this should be a scandal. obama said he ended these things, yet he is continuing them but by proxy. there has been tweaks to the

machine. but in general, a lot of the policies that many generals were outraged about under bush have continued under obama, just with a rebranding. >> let me ask this question of emma. i want to reread a statement from the kremlin about the aftermath of boston. the russian and u.s. president have agreed by telephone to increase cooperation on counterterrorism following the boston marathon bombings. the kremlin said on saturday both sides underline their interest 234 deepening the close cooperation of the russian and u.s. special services in the fight against international terrorism, but gave no details. i think one of the reasons i wanted to have you here and jeremy here and the congressman is that what we have seen over the last four or five years is an expansion of the battlefield. and in the wake of the fact we're dealing with it appears suspects who are ethnically chechen, one was in dagestan, what would it look like for the u.s. and russia to cooperate more closely, and is that a bad idea, emma? >> well, i think that probably has been happening for quite a while now.

but i think shared intelligence sources is a good idea generally, actually. but, you know, the agree to which the intelligence services in russia have improved certainly over the last five years. and that's precisely because they have managed to get more local communicators, local dagestanis, local chechens to act on their behalf as intelligence gatherers. that's also problematic because it creates divisions within that particular society. but it has to be said that russian intelligence has improved over the last five years in both regions. and if the russian government is prepared to continue sharing information as it openly said that it would also do after september 11th, 2001, then hopefully that kind of cooperation can help them get to the core of the problem. i think one of the core problems, though, as we all know is a socio and economic one. that essentially in these regions they are very poor. >> it also seems like the situation in chechnya particularly highlights some of the downside of force as a

method of counterterrorism in so far as we have seen that area of the world become more and more violent the more force that has been applied to it. >> yeah. what we're seeing is the results of two chechen wars in the 1990s. enormous disproportionate force used again the chechen population, and the islamization of the region. >> congressman, what oversight do you want to see applied to the kinds of things that jeremy is talking about? >> i think there needs to be some to guarantee our constitution is still what we live by. at the same time, the world is shrinking, and we have to be aware of the problems that are out there. there are dr. nos in the world. they used to be on the movie screen. now they're in real life, and you got to be concerned about that. i think getting together with russia is good, although the